中国高等教育有效性DEA评价分析

发布时间：2018-03-18 23:23

本文选题：数据包络分析　切入点：中国高等教育有效性　出处：《天津大学》2014年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：自2003年开始，数据包络分析（DEA）被国内学者普遍应用于评价中国高等教育的有效性。但其评价结果差异巨大，乱象纷呈。基于DEA评价原则与应用条件，对国内16篇关于高校有效性评价的论文进行初步分析，可以发现，其表层原因在于：（1）不少论文违背了DEA评价所要求的决策评价单元可比性原则；笼统将不同类别高校、不同地域的高校一并放在一起进行比较。这样比较的结果不能给高等教育的良好发展提供科学的指导性意见，而且将不同类别高校（如师范类和理工类）放在一起，评价的结果未免差强人意，容易惹来反对意见。（2）投入产出评价指标体系设计歧义、混乱甚至投入与产出误设置；一些文献未对指标相互包含性进行分析。（3）指标数量过多，不符合指标数与被评价决策单元数量间的规范要求。（4）文献研究内容与主题不一致，内容前后不一致，言语不通，逻辑有误，甚至出现低级的文献引用错误。有的文献的改进措施并没有针对文献中的分析，让学者难以信服。另一个相对深层的原因是这些论文研究几乎是独立的，后继研究很少学习、甚至不参考前期相关研究，谈不上继承与改进，很难有实质的学术进步与发展。这一点可以从学者们的选取的指标各不相同体现出来。因此，缺乏学术研究继承性和改进，很难在DEA有效性评价方面有所改进。严格按照DEA方法应用条件和原则，选取中国20所985综合类高校作为决策单元，确定以充分代表中国高等教育投入的“人、财、物”的教学人员、科技经费和图书馆藏书作为投入指标，确定以最能证明中国高等教育产出的国外及全国性刊物发表论文作为产出指标，进行实证分析。针对国内20所985综合类高校有效性的实证分析的结果为：上海交通大学、南京大学、中国人民大学、厦门大学等4所高校为DEA有效，处于规模收益不变的阶段；北京大学、复旦大学等其余16所高校为DEA无效，或者处于规模收益递增阶段，或者处于规模收益递减阶段。论文的创新和特色主要是：第一，为中国高等教育未来良好的发展提供科学、有效、具有价值性的评价思路。第二，，有利于摆脱评价中国高等教育有效性DEA评价存在巨大差异以及评价结果混乱不堪的局面。第三，有利于为今后学者研究中国高等教育有效性构建出更加科学、合理、有效的指标体系。第四，本文能够深化今后基于DEA去评价中国高等教育有效性中决策单元与指标体系数量之间的关系，指引学者在今后的研究中更能准确的把握好基于DEA来评价中国高等教育有效性的正确性。第五，从实证角度举例分析，提供直观的评价思路与过程。
[Abstract]:Since 2003, data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) has been widely used by domestic scholars to evaluate the effectiveness of higher education in China. Through a preliminary analysis of 16 papers on the effectiveness evaluation of colleges and universities in China, it can be found that the superficial reason lies in the fact that many papers violate the principle of comparability of decision evaluation units required by DEA evaluation. The results of this comparison do not provide scientific guidance for the good development of higher education, but also put together different types of universities (such as teachers' colleges and engineering). The result of evaluation is not satisfactory, and it is easy to cause disapproval. 2) the design of input-output evaluation index system is ambiguous, confusion and even input-output mis-setting; some literatures do not analyze the inclusiveness of the index each other, and the number of indicators is too many. The content of the literature research is inconsistent with the subject, the content is inconsistent, the language is impassable, and the logic is wrong. There are even low-level citation errors. Some of the improvement measures are not based on the analysis in the literature, which makes the scholars hard to believe. Another relatively deep reason is that the research in these papers is almost independent, and the subsequent studies are seldom studied. Even without reference to previous relevant studies, there is no inheritance and improvement, and it is difficult to make substantial academic progress and development. This can be reflected in the different indicators selected by scholars. Therefore, there is a lack of inheritance and improvement in academic research. It is difficult to improve the effectiveness of DEA. In strict accordance with the application conditions and principles of the DEA method, 20 Chinese 985 comprehensive colleges and universities are selected as decision-making units to determine the teaching staff who fully represent the investment in higher education in China. Science and technology funds and library collections are used as input indicators, and foreign and national publications that can best prove the output of China's higher education are chosen as output indicators. The results of empirical analysis are as follows: Shanghai Jiaotong University, Nanjing University, Renmin University of China, Xiamen University and other four universities are DEA effective and at the same stage of scale income; The other 16 universities, such as Peking University and Fudan University, have no effect on DEA, or are in the stage of increasing or decreasing the return of scale. The innovation and characteristics of the thesis are as follows:. First, to provide scientific, effective and valuable evaluation ideas for the future good development of higher education in China. Second, it is helpful to get rid of the huge difference in DEA evaluation of the effectiveness of higher education in China and the confusion of the evaluation results. Thirdly, it is helpful to construct a more scientific, reasonable and effective index system for the future research on the effectiveness of higher education in China. In 4th, this paper can deepen the relationship between the number of decision making units and index system in evaluating the effectiveness of higher education in China based on DEA in the future. In the future research, the guide scholars can accurately grasp the validity of higher education in China based on DEA. 5th, from the perspective of empirical example analysis, provide intuitive evaluation ideas and processes.
【学位授予单位】：天津大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：G649.2

【参考文献】